Coming Soon
So far, only the Interfaith Center has been definitely booked to show 9/11 Press for Truth -- on Friday, November 3 at 8 p.m. in the Dave Columbo Memorial Library.
People should not expect a documentary about explosives being used to bring down the World Trade Center buildings. Nor does it delve into the hole in the Pentagon. It focuses instead on published facts and information available globally, but ignored by the 9/11 Commission. The film's purpose is to establish a new commission, one free of control by the Bush administration.
Given the fact that more than $40 million was spent on Starr's pursuit of Clinton, and only $14 million to investigate the 9/11 catastrophe, people wonder: What is the administration hiding? The latest revelation in Woodward's new book, about Condoleezza Rice's brushing off the July terror briefing by CIA director Tenet, makes the "let it happen on purpose" (LIHOP) scenario more plausible. The only real debate within the "9/11 Truth" camp is if the evil-doers LIHOP or MIHOP (Made it happen on purpose.) Viewing 9/11 Press for Truth will make you wonder. A new investigation will answer many questions.
Another possible venue is Big Boys Q'n, which has a Big Screen, beer and food, and WiFi. The guy who runs the place is skeptical about the crowd for such an event at a bar, but willing to put out a nice spread for folks. Some Wednesday night. Maybe have a band too. Make it a fundraiser for the Truthy Salukis.
The lady at Student Programming Council (SPC) was helpful. The best way to show a film at the Student Center is for a Recognized Student Organization (RSO) to sponsor the event. Will any student group be interested in doing so? There's a long list of RSO's, but only a few possible sponsor groups on the list.
Confirmed venues for future showings of 9/11 Press for Truth will be announced in this blog.
5 Comments:
Dave,
I didn't vote for Bush but call me cynical...
I'm waiting for The Warren Commission: The Press for the Truth, or Oliver Stone to do a movie, or something on the Freemasons (did you hear that none of them showed up for work at the WTC on 9/11?).
My friend Don Critchlow (SLU, History) teaches a course on conspiracy theories in history. Not _as_ history but in history. Then again, that's a fine distinction, right?
Haven't checked you in a while -- been spending most of my time at the Gregory blog (he's a gym buddy so I can also disagree with him offline at the Rec.). He won't be here much longer...heading west, I hear.
Jon, Don't be cynical. Cynics suck. Skeptical works. Try that. It's all about the evidence.
Conspiracy "theories" in history or Conspiracies in history. Another fine, but important distinction, no?
Don't tell me you don't believe in conspiracies, because that would be the most naive position a political science pundit could take!
p.s. regarding Peter leaving town for greener pastures out West. I'm thinking of moving west myself (or south or north or east) next summer, after the local election -- unless Jessica Davis is voted Mayor. ;-)
"Sucks." Wash you mouth out with soap, Dave. You're a gentleman and such language?!
Dictionary: "Cynic: One who habitually doubts or questions : skeptic, cynic, disbeliever, doubter, doubting Thomas, questioner, agnostic, scoffer."
From some of your posts, this would fit.
Does H.L. Mencken "suck?"
Read some of my others posts on Peter's blog and you'll see I am a cynic (or skeptic is a better word) when it comes to government and do-gooders (Wilsonian, Bushian or otherwise). A cynic is a naive idealist who has seen or heard it all before (and if you study history, your seeing and hearing expands beyond your personal experiences). I'm an idealist, I've just lost my naivete and become skeptical of, among other things, "instant histories" and punditry.
FYI: I try to limit my "punditry" to something I know about and acknowledge my inexpertise in other areas. Beware "experts" who extend their alleged expertise outside their proper boundaries.
As for the particulars, show me the evidence, what 9/11 theorists have shown me in writing doesn't convince. Yet there is always a "paranoid style of politics," Right or Left.
"Sucks." Wash your mouth out with soap, Dave. You're a gentleman and such language?!
Dictionary: "Cynic: One who habitually doubts or questions : skeptic, cynic, disbeliever, doubter, doubting Thomas, questioner, agnostic, scoffer."
From some of your posts, this would fit.
Does H.L. Mencken "suck?"
Read some of my others posts on Peter's blog and you'll see I am a cynic (or skeptic is a better word) when it comes to government and do-gooders (Wilsonian, Bushian or otherwise). A cynic is a naive idealist who has seen or heard it all before (and if you study history, your seeing and hearing expands beyond your personal experiences). I'm an idealist, I've just lost my naivete and become skeptical of, among other things, "instant histories" and punditry.
FYI: I try to limit my "punditry" to something I know about and acknowledge my inexpertise in other areas. Beware "experts" who extend their alleged expertise outside their proper boundaries.
As for the particulars, show me the evidence, what 9/11 theorists have shown me in writing doesn't convince. Yet there is always a "paranoid style of politics," Right or Left.
Jon, I shoulda said "cynicism" sucks. Cynics can be amusing. Cynicism sucks the life out of things. Cynics who never alter their positions are bores.
You are indeed a skeptic -- and a critic -- of government waste.
"Instant history" is the official version of 9/11. I won't go into all the holes in the story. At least not in this space. You are right to be skeptical about alternate theories of "what happened" but foolish to reject off-handedly the possibility that the Bush version commits the lie of omission.
Beware experts who claim that they alone can apprehend or express the truth.
Beware amateurs who do not listen to experts.
Two experts on the 911 Commission report -- the co-chairmen -- say it was a whitewash.
The victim families are not satisfied.
This is not paranoia of politics. It isn't a "conservative" vs. "liberal" issue, but rule of law. A crime was committed.
An impartial investigation is called for. One that takes in all the evidence, including the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 into instant rubble (WTC7 -- which wasn't struck by a plane ). The official investigation failed to mention this, and many other things.
The documentary 911 Press for Truth will be shown in Carbondale in November.
Post a Comment
<< Home